tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post3496284231414158083..comments2016-12-07T13:10:55.991-05:00Comments on edward_ winkleman: "Things Fall Apart," Curated by Joy Garnett & Artists' Talk @ Winkleman GalleryEdward_http://www.blogger.com/profile/00110804435781673357noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-19900467980534555452011-10-14T13:04:59.293-04:002011-10-14T13:04:59.293-04:00I’ve come across this thread quite by accident, bu...I’ve come across this thread quite by accident, but it has been quite an amusing read.<br /><br />Some things need to be put into perspective, and rated by their importance. <br /><br />Let’s for example imagine that:<br /><br />Your “Curator Camp” were Catholics, and<br />Your “Organized by Camp” were Protestants.<br />Depending on what part of the world you live in,<br />you may have murdered each other by now!<br /><br />Some people find that violent kind of religion just fine, but they have completely forgot the end-game. Christian’s who are more interested in their manmade rules and denominations are going to find out the hard way, that they should have only been worried about God’s opinion. Nothing else counts!<br /><br />And I would say the same of you lot! There is nothing written here that makes me think you give a damn about the art on display, how well it will be received by the public, or if the review will be favorable or not. Quarreling about the title of the person who has busted his/her ass to put on a show, is pretty low on the “importance meter”. The art needs to move people, the art needs to sell, the public opinion about the show needs to be positive. Nothing else counts!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-40099514336407227302009-01-19T17:13:00.000-05:002009-01-19T17:13:00.000-05:00Duchamp curated shows and stuff. I'm a little uncl...Duchamp curated shows and stuff. I'm a little unclear as to the entire curatorial process, but I think if you look at the first Armory Show you will see quite a bit of cross curatorial/artists collaboration/collusion.<BR/><BR/>What is the real deal? <BR/><BR/>This sort of ethical concern only means anything within the group - where a curator is seen as having all the power and the individual against the group having none.<BR/><BR/>This is not the case - artists have power. Even the tender little shoots who will be crushed by being edited out or ostracized.<BR/><BR/>Imagine being curated out of a show because of a curator/artist who has his ear so far to the ground he is in it?<BR/><BR/>Do you want to be a part of that?<BR/><BR/>If that show is seen as being cannonical (like a textbook/catalog summation), of course you should be able to address the omission of your relevant contributions to the scene, or the genre, or the style, or the movement, or the zeitgeist, or the stylistics, or your parallel developments and doppelganger status as a shadow cabinet to the mainstream within the subculture.<BR/><BR/>Just as the sub culture is the answer to the mainstream of the dominant.<BR/><BR/>But even if you are a vital part of a community, does not the donut have a hole? Do rivers not have banks? Does sand have consciousness?<BR/>Deep the rivers run, sleepless.<BR/><BR/>In this web of associations we draw lines - and these lines are what get us into trouble, black and white, white and black. Let the red run!<BR/><BR/>Leap froogies leap; the lethal lines!<BR/><BR/>Divide and conquer has ever been the strategy of power - and as I mentioned long ago, everyone is guilty, even semi-populist (and very generous) Winkleman, of making distinctions.<BR/><BR/>Us and them. You can be what you want. Pick a side but don't be both at the same time, it confuses people.<BR/><BR/>At the least, change your name and wear a hat.zipthwunghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02761727194113640578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-19786772228931172802009-01-15T20:31:00.000-05:002009-01-15T20:31:00.000-05:00I like Julie's post- and in that vein, why not a t...I like Julie's post- and in that vein, why not a title or description that expresses something specific to this situation like 'Joy's work in conversation with... [or just the title, Joy Garnett: in context, if it was an exhibit to feature her work] Hope you have a great opening, too!Donna Dodsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17068704959733467515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-88357579749882033972009-01-15T20:19:00.000-05:002009-01-15T20:19:00.000-05:00I don't see the need for a distinction. In fact, ...I don't see the need for a distinction. In fact, of all the artists in your gallery, Joy is the "natural" curator, and I look forward to seeing it for that reason. (For the record, I would much rather see an artist curate around their own work than a gallerist devise a history for it - and that is a distinction about what constitutes a conflict of interest and what doesn't.)Catherine Spaethhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10518522698505489654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-35024745133956648202009-01-15T17:06:00.000-05:002009-01-15T17:06:00.000-05:00To my mind, an "organizer" selects the theme and t...To my mind, an "organizer" selects the theme and the artists and guides the selection of work, allowing the artists a little leeway. A "curator" makes specific selections of work from each artist.<BR/><BR/>Depending on how familiar the organizer or curator is to the artist's work, a studio visit may or not be necessary.<BR/><BR/>Honestly, I don't care whether the artist is in the show or not, as long as it's a good show. Self-serving intentions are usually pretty apparent. I appreciate that in our world there are gallerists who write or make art; artists who write or curate; curators who make art or write; writers who make art or curate. And all of us collect (or trade, at the very least.) We're living outside the box. Why shouldn't we think the same way?<BR/><BR/>That said, Joy, Ed, Paul and All, have a great opening! I'm house sitting in Massachusetts but will see the show later in the month.Joanne Matterahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02564594823192456546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-8814914914239036562009-01-15T16:59:00.000-05:002009-01-15T16:59:00.000-05:00Something tells me that if Joan is here, Zipth is ...Something tells me that if Joan is here, Zipth is not far. l-_<BR/><BR/>Love that rendition of Depeche Mode btw,<BR/><BR/>CedricCedric Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-30914998013957308302009-01-15T16:12:00.000-05:002009-01-15T16:12:00.000-05:00To insure the integrity of this exhibit I must dem...To insure the integrity of this exhibit I must demand that Ms Garnett remove her work from this show-and I'll be there in a few hours with one of mine to replace it. It's the right thing to do.Markhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18403713669935706127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-9547505193109476282009-01-15T16:03:00.000-05:002009-01-15T16:03:00.000-05:00I simply think that if you have your own work in a...I simply think that if you have your own work in a show that you have "curated", you don't just say the show is "curated" by you. You find another word. <BR/><BR/>"An exhibition of work by Joy and some people she wants to have show with her" or something. <BR/><BR/>But then I'm a person who declines to acknowledge or use the term "gallerist" because there really is no such word.Christopher/Markhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10017441710671425124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-68024827672965150752009-01-15T14:44:00.000-05:002009-01-15T14:44:00.000-05:00All chairs are quite different", he utters not mer...All chairs are quite different", he utters not merely a misstatement, but a contradiction in terms. If all chairs were quite different, you could not call them "all chairs."Joanhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX3fn5wrXuYnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-10070728275018395342009-01-15T14:21:00.000-05:002009-01-15T14:21:00.000-05:00It's just these types of things that I read this b...It's just these types of things that I read this blog for--Weird gallery etiquette. Honestly, I am a hick artist from upstate seeking to understand the gallery/artist relationship, but I can't see a problem with pulling together a cohesive body of work and having a show, even if my work is included. If the word "curated" already has a definition that can't include this type of situation, then make up a new name for it. Then the format can grow and flourish and create new selling situations! Long live and prosper!Julie Sadlerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13321117239292373395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-1464239625339457672009-01-15T10:44:00.000-05:002009-01-15T10:44:00.000-05:00It is your gallery. Do whatever the hell you want ...It is your gallery. Do whatever the hell you want to do. Everything is transparent. <BR/><BR/>If Joy was the "one who ha[d] the care and superintendence of something" then so be it. I would love to see more artists taking over curatorial roles.eageageaghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02264515780209171036noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-70961788621634616312009-01-15T10:11:00.000-05:002009-01-15T10:11:00.000-05:00Yeah, I knew that would be the focus of this threa...Yeah, I knew that would be the focus of this thread. <BR/><BR/>For every rule (and why "on principle their own work should be excluded" is a rule is not entirely clear to me), there are good exceptions, in my opinion. <BR/><BR/>This exhibition grew out of a discussion about a new body Joy had shown me. We talked about why the work seemed to have connections with a lot of other work we had seen recently, and the entire genesis of the show was to put all that work into the same exhibition and see what else we learned. It would have been standing on some principle to the exclusion of actually accomplishing what we wanted to do to not include Joy's work. <BR/><BR/>I guess I could have hidden the fact that she did all the work to bring the show together to appease the purists, but that didn't seem appropriate to me.Edward_http://www.blogger.com/profile/00110804435781673357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-82734701355060146892009-01-15T09:29:00.000-05:002009-01-15T09:29:00.000-05:00Interesting though it can be, and usually is, for ...Interesting though it can be, and usually is, for artists to curate shows, on principle their own work should be excluded.<BR/><BR/>Interest in the curator/artist's own work will likely be enhanced by an interesting show they curated, by its very absence.<BR/><BR/>Perfect early (first?) example: Raid the Icebox at RISD in 1970Christopher/Markhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10017441710671425124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-87139660200837117072009-01-15T09:10:00.000-05:002009-01-15T09:10:00.000-05:00I don't necessarily disagree with you on that Fran...I don't necessarily disagree with you on that Franklin, but until there is a wider consensus among the folks doing all the hard work of "organizing" an exhibition (and it is tons of work), I think it's ok for it to go either way. <BR/><BR/>The New York Times uses "organized by" regardless of what the press release says, but that phrase has its own problems, IMHO. It feels like it minimizes the work put in. <BR/><BR/>In the era of more widespread independent curating/organizing it probably does behoove the industry to agree on usage, but I think "organized by" isn't quite the correct phrase.Edward_http://www.blogger.com/profile/00110804435781673357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12363995.post-27471049675789597612009-01-15T08:54:00.000-05:002009-01-15T08:54:00.000-05:00With all due respect, I have long felt that if you...With all due respect, I have long felt that if your work is in the show that you put together, you should refer to yourself as the organizer, not the curator. The selection and installation of your own work in an exhibition is not curatorship, and referring to it as such would be colossally pretentious. Choosing and handling everyone elses' work is curatorship, of course, but given a mix of the two, the pretentiousness is diluted, not eliminated.<BR/><BR/>Best of luck with the show anyway.Franklinhttp://artblog.netnoreply@blogger.com